Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Health Care · ·
$13.62
▼ $0.27 (-1.9%)
Market data updated: 09/20 05:32 AM
Fundamentals updated: 09/20/2026
News analyzed: 09/20/2026
Market Cap
$2.06B
Day Range
$13.46 - $14.28
52-Week Range
$7.48 - $18.57
Beta
—
Next Earnings
09.11.2026
Support
$11.93
Resistance
$18.24
BHVN is a stock from the Healthcare sector — Pharmaceuticals, biotech, medical devices, and health insurance — less sensitive to economic cycles, but exposed to regulation and FDA approvals.
-12.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 5/22 factors positiveRisk: High
This score and all analysis on this page are for informational and educational purposes only and do not constitute investment advice. Read the full disclaimer
Weighted: Technical 25% · Fundamental 20% · Growth 15% · Valuation 15% · News 10% · Quality 10% · Risk 5%
Overall Score
🔴 Bearish
Technical Trend
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Earnings per share (EPS) growth
Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 26.1%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$105.76 vs. price $13.62 (-876.5%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
NO RELIABLE ECHO FOUND
Only 2 historical analog(s) found after removing overlapping dates — too few for a statistically meaningful comparison.
Historical matches considered: 2
TIME ECHO identifies historical situations that resemble the current market state. Historical outcomes are not guarantees of future performance. Similarity does not imply causation, and results may change as new data becomes available.
🗓️ What Changed This Week
🌱 Building History
We don't have a real data point from a week ago for this stock yet. The weekly comparison will appear once enough history has accumulated.
📊 Score History
43
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
5d ago · $12.71
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 28 to -15 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
5d ago · $12.71
Evidence: Panic-selling score jumped from 7 to 32 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
16d ago · $15.86
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 58)
What happened after
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
🐻 Bear Case
🔍 What Could Prove This Wrong
Not enough data yet to generate this synthesis.
This isn't a price-direction forecast — just a synthesis of real, already-computed data, and future conditions that could change the picture.
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
57
Quality
No data available
Value
38
Momentum
28
Risk
40
Sentiment
62
Fundamental
46
Institutional
No data available
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
Not enough comparably-scored stocks yet to show similar matches.
This stock hasn't been analyzed by StockIQAI's movement engine yet — coverage is still expanding. Check back soon.
Recent media coverage of Biohaven focuses on a sudden FDA partial hold on its BHV-7000 epilepsy trial, triggering a sharp stock drop and analyst downgrades. The setback is framed as the latest blow to the company's pipeline after earlier seizure-related issues. In contrast, Biohaven announced a major licensing agreement for its lead epilepsy candidate opakalim with SK Biopharma, securing up to $795 million and $400 million in near‑term cash, offering a financial bright spot amid the trial turmoil.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Biohaven Ltd. Common. News trend score: 62. Reason: 8 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 6 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
22
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
50
Psychology
40
Fundamentals
46
Technical
28
Valuation
38
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price (3M)
+0%
Market Narrative
37
Fundamental Reality
50
Narrative Gap
-13
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
Market behavior suggests heightened optimism, with Euphoria at 28 and Overconfidence at 20. Evidence such as +8.3% momentum and a 27.5% premium above the 200‑day average supports this bullish sentiment. However, the mixed narrative gap (gap 4) and neutral news sentiment indicate uncertainty. A key open question is whether the strong technical momentum can be sustained amid limited catalysts.
Updated: 09/11/2026, 12:07 AM
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 3D Investor Psychology
Signal classification confidence: High (confidence in the behavioral read, not a price prediction). Describes observable market behavior, not what any individual investor thinks, and is not a buy/sell signal.
🏛️ Investor DNA — Historical Investors
A Historical Strategy Simulation: assuming each investor follows their documented principles, how would they rate this stock today? This is not a prediction of what they would actually do.
🟢 Best match
Walter Bagehot — 100/100
🔴 Weakest match
Morgan Housel — 2/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
Based on their documented principles, the model estimates that Walter Bagehot’s liquidity focus gives BHVN the highest score, while Peter Lynch’s growth lens yields a high but incomplete rating, and value investors such as Benjamin Graham and Gerald Loeb produce low scores due to cheapness concerns and a risk profile that could threaten capital. Behavioral and cycle‑based analysts (Mackay, Howard Marks, Nelson, Livermore) fall in the middle, reflecting mixed crowd‑excitement and cycle signals, and market‑efficiency viewpoints (Malkiel & Bogle) also give a middling assessment, noting limited advantage over a broad index. These divergent scores arise because each methodology weighs liquidity, growth, valuation, and behavioral cues differently, leading to varied overall conclusions for the same stock.
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 100
Strong liquidity — would likely survive a real credit squeeze
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 87
Not enough growth data for a real Lynch read
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 78
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🟢 71
Cycle position looks favorable — closer to oversold than overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🟡 56
No clear edge either way
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 50
Mixed — a good business, but expectations may already be high
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 47
Somewhere in the middle of the cycle
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🟡 44
Not statistically cheap enough for the Enterprising Investor's looser safety bar
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🟡 43
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 39
Risk profile Loeb would flag as a real threat to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 36
Negative trend — against Livermore's core rule of trading with the trend
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🔴 35
Mixed case — the evidence for picking this stock over an index is not strong
Key question
Do I actually have an edge here, or do I just think I do?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 33
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 15
Not enough dividend/growth data for a real Smith read
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 25%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 2
The kind of volatility that tends to shake patient holders out
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 0
Not enough fundamentals data for a real Fisher read
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 20%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 281 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🔴 Most indicators support a downtrend (1 bullish · 7 bearish · 2 neutral)
A market-structure read based purely on real price and volume data — not full classic Wyckoff schematic identification (Phase A-E), but a quantitative analysis of what can reliably be computed: trading ranges, "effort vs. result", volume within the range, and Spring/Upthrust detection.
The stock is in a clear downtrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
Medium confidence
The Wyckoff Method, developed by Richard Wyckoff in the early 20th century, reads the balance of supply and demand through price and volume, based on the premise that large investors ("smart money") quietly accumulate shares before rallies and quietly distribute them before declines. The read here is based solely on real price and volume data — full, precise identification of classic Wyckoff patterns (such as Phases A-E) requires human chart-reading experience and judgment, so this is an approximate algorithmic read, not a substitute for professional analysis. This should not be considered investment advice.
Gross Margin
—
Operating Margin
—
Net Margin
—
EBITDA Margin
—
ROE
-1418.8%
ROA
-163.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$6.86
Cash
$229.96M
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
3.18
Debt/Equity
—
אין נתונים היסטוריים זמינים.
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$13.62
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$105.76
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-876.5%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
10.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.0% | $-671.17M | $-615.75M |
| 2 | 8.1% | $-725.70M | $-610.81M |
| 3 | 6.3% | $-771.06M | $-595.40M |
| 4 | 4.4% | $-804.79M | $-570.13M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-824.91M | $-536.14M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-610.15M
Terminal Value
$-13.01B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-8.45B
Enterprise Value
$-11.38B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-11.38B
*The DCF model is an estimate based on assumptions — not a guaranteed forecast. You can change the assumptions to examine different scenarios.
Book Value per Share
$0.48
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$0.30
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 6 neutral, 6 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 11.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Investor's Business Daily · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Barrons.com · 10.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
InvestorsHub · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
Stocktwits · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
Benzinga · 10.9.2026
ChartMill · 10.9.2026
Yahoo · 10.9.2026
BioPharma Dive · 10.9.2026
Biohaven Ltd. Common (BHVN) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 43/100, rated "Weak" (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
BHVN currently scores 43/100 (Weak) across the categories we measure (a partial score — based on only 6 of 7 categories, some data is currently unavailable). StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — use this as one data point in your own research, not as investment advice.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, BHVN's estimated fair value is -$105.76, which is 876.5% below the current price of $13.62. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
BHVN's technical score is 28/100, which currently reads as bearish — based on real price/volume signals (moving averages, RSI, MACD, and more), not a prediction of what happens next.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 26.1%; Current ratio: 3.18; Price is above the 200-day average.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$105.76 vs. price $13.62 (-876.5%); ATR: 8.4% of price; Calmar: -0.10 (3y annualized return -9.0% / max drawdown 87.0%).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for BHVN.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 0 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GREGORY JULIA P | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 68,693 | +68,693 | — |
| Heffernan Michael Thomas | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 68,693 | +68,693 | — |
| Mehta Kishan | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 68,693 | +68,693 | — |
| Antonijevic Irina | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 68,693 | +68,693 | — |
| Bailey Gregory | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 68,693 | +68,693 | — |
| CHILDS JOHN W | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 68,693 | +68,693 | — |
| HUGIN ROBERT J | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 68,693 | +68,693 | — |
| CHILDS JOHN W | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 68,693 | +68,693 | — |
| GREGORY JULIA P | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 68,693 | +68,693 | — |
| HUGIN ROBERT J | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 68,693 | +68,693 | — |
| Bailey Gregory | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 68,693 | +68,693 | — |
| Heffernan Michael Thomas | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 68,693 | +68,693 | — |
| Mehta Kishan | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 68,693 | +68,693 | — |
| Antonijevic Irina | Grant/Award from Employer | 28.4.2026 | 68,693 | +68,693 | — |
| Mehta Kishan | Gift | 17.3.2026 | 17,342 | -17,342 | — |
| Mehta Kishan | Gift | 17.3.2026 | 17,342 | +17,342 | — |
| Mehta Kishan | Gift | 17.3.2026 | 5,320 | -17,342 | — |
| Mehta Kishan | Gift | 17.3.2026 | 17,342 | +17,342 | — |
| Coric Vlad | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.2.2026 | 550,000 | +550,000 | — |
| Buten Matthew | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.2.2026 | 175,000 | +175,000 | — |
| Clark George C. | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.2.2026 | 50,000 | +50,000 | — |
| Car Bruce | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.2.2026 | 175,000 | +175,000 | — |
| Gentile Kimberly | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.2.2026 | 175,000 | +175,000 | — |
| Gentile Kimberly | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.2.2026 | 175,000 | +175,000 | — |
| Coric Vlad | Grant/Award from Employer | 27.2.2026 | 550,000 | +550,000 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
19,000,171 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 18,185,373 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
50.6% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 58.4% the prior week
Based on daily short-sale volume (Reg SHO) — a different metric from the open short interest above: this is daily trading volume, not an open position, so it updates weekly rather than biweekly.
Full breakdown of every data type and its source: Data Sources · Methodology